“The next claim we hear is that we underpay compared to subscription services such as Spotify. But that argument confuses two different services: music subscriptions that cost £10 a month versus ad-supported music videos. It’s like comparing what a black cab driver earns from fares to what they earn showing ads in their taxi.”
This is a very interesting battle.
Why a “black cab driver”? Am I missing something here?
I think that is a British term for traditional cabs as they are all painted black….I could be wrong.
I was surprised to read that US Radio did not pay royalties for the songs they played. I always thought they did.
That’s correct. In the UK we have two types of taxi – Hackney cabs which you can hail in the street, these are usually black in colour(although this is not a requirement). Then we have ‘minicabs’ that can only be prebooked through an office – these are usually your standard average car – colours, makes & models etc all vary.
“my ro<? >om mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet 98$/hr”..,……..!wc456ctwo days ago grey MacLaren P1 I bought after earning 18,512 DoIIars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k DoIIars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over. hourly 87 DoIIars…Learn. More right Here !wc456:➽:➽:➽➽➽➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsPointGetPayHourly$98…. .❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦::::::!wc456………..
You gave incorrect information! US Radio Station have to pay a Broadcast fee to play a song! So two different kinds of fees.
Spotify doesn’t make enough per play to make this argument valid. We all know YouTube is ripping off their content providers.
They do. The price is set by the US Copyright office.
Who gave incorrect information … it sounded more like a question – rb763 posed – or maybe another post was deleted.
There was “payola” where some radio stations had to pay some “fees” to play certain music from certain artists or labels… kind of like a promo, yet a bit more controversial.
umm, I do not see YouTube as any different that spotify – they have (or had?) similar models – though YouTube is only recently getting into “high quality” productions and they have also changed their terms, it would seem most “streaming” services “screw” their content providers.
Payola was a bribe paid to radio stations to prefer specific artists over other artists. It was the record companies who were corrupt in that case, as well as the radio stations for taking bribes to favor one artist over another for reasons other than artistic quality.
My point is that it’s hypocritical for Google to make that argument because Spotify is not making a bunch of money for playing music, they make money exactly the same way Google does, through advertising. It’s like Google arguing it’s unfair that Spotify uses billboards to advertise because Google uses billboards to advertise.
So yes, they are the same, and no, Spotify doesn’t have any advantage over Google.